Apologize to whom? One of the two assholes that just shat their venom all over the US Army? Neither of them made that connection. They just decided to pigeonhole the Army as lunatic killers and incompetents, and that pisses me off. A lot. If you shit on the Army, you shit on me. Net Hack Slasher was the one who made that connection, and he seems like a reasonable, intelligent human being. I'll apologize to those other two bastards when they apologize to every grunt who ever died in service to his country.
Yeah- you would figure that in an army of MILLIONS, that they would be able to assure that 100% of them were not going to snap ever in their lives... yeah, that makes sense. While I disagree that only "soldiers should lead soldiers," I do agree that politicians should not lead soldiers. Good intelligence officers, tacticians, and even generals would make terrible soldiers, and vice versa- so it is a bit too dismissive to tahat extreme a stance.
There's as many crazy fuckers in the Army as anywhere. Most of the real lunatics are jarheads, though. I resent the generalization that we're all crazed killers. That's what gets me riled.
Military intelligence officers, tacticians and Generals ARE soldiers. There are a lot of high-ranking officers in the Army these days that never saw any action, which I feel is insane, but at least they've done 20+ years in the service. General Shinseki is an ass, but at least he's an Army man. He is a politician-soldier, and I'll always hate him for stealing the Ranger beret and giving it to everyone for "morale purposes," but as hateful as he is, I'd feel more comfortable with him in charge than a spoiled little oil-industry rich boy whose daddy got him into the National Guard so he wouldn't have to actually GO TO WAR and FIGHT FOR HIS COUNTRY. And this man is our commander-in-chief. That's scary. What's worse, fucking Rumsfeld is Secretary of the Army. A lot of soldiers have taken to call him "The Enemy," myself included. Those are the people who should never lead fighting men. Ever.
There are plenty of badasses that proved themselves in combat that are wearing stars on their shoulders these days. It's just the guys in the top positions that are totally unqualified. How the fuck is a civilian supposed to tell soldiers what to do?
Well, I am with you on all of the Ranger stuff- taking away the beret was BULLSHIT. My recently deceased grandfather was a Ranger who fought in Korea, and I appreciate the distinction that SHOULD be made. What is the point of being "elite" if you are not distinguished for it? Symbols are bery important, and it is lame to hurt the moral of your best troops like that... As far as all of those people actually being soldiers... I guess that is just arguing semantics. My idea of a soldier is someone who is on the field in the thick of the fight. As far as having a president who has never served- this is not necessarily a bad thing. We cannot demand that all presidents be in the military, because there has to be a distiction between those in power and the armed forces. A president is in power because of the will of the people, not the power of the military. I agree that the Secretary of Defense should have some stronger military ties... the man is supposed to be the President's advisor on the military. That is what the cabinet is for, after all- advice. It is natural to assume that the President cannot possibly be an expert or totally qualifies for everything the job entails (take Jakegnosis's military example). His cabinet is supposed to be able to fill in those holes... I think it is extreme to say that a civilian has no buisness telling a soldier what to do. In some cases- a civilian can know better. I am a civilian from a long line of military men. And while I am proud of their service, I decided not to take that path (though I had a brief flirtation with it.) Why? Because there are other ways to serve your country than joining the military. If we were ever truly threatened, I would be one of the first to join (pre-draft), but I see no need to do that now, when we have more than enough soldiers now. My efforts could better be spent elsewhere. But this does not mean that I do not understand what a solider does, and how to use them. It is understandable for a soldier to be upset when the military is used for OTHER than it's intended purpose (see: Bosnia), but it is dangerous to take such an extreme view. There ARE civilians that would be effective utilizers of the military- most of them are not politicians...
(edited by Pool-Boy on 28.10.02 1333) Craig Reade "Pool Boy"Detroit Lions! 2-5!
It's fine for the president to be a civilian. But if he is, we shouldn't look to him for military leadership. He should have someone (ostensibly Rumsfeld, but be serious) to take over once the shit goes down. I wouldn't trust Bush to fight his way out of a wet paper bag. Bush is fine for pointing in the general direction of where the fighting is going down, but he should leave anything beyond that to the professionals.
BTW, I was still in the 3rd Ranger Battalion when they stole our berets. You've never seen that many angry badasses beforte in your life. Why couldn't they just give everyone else a tan beret and let us keep our black? I still get salty when I see some fucking typewriter mechanic wearing a black beret.